RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To determine oncology patients' pattern and rationale of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use, and canvass their views on the relative merits of allopathic and alternative medicine. DESIGN: Observational study of opinions from a cohort of patients using self-completion questionnaires. SETTING: Oncology departments of two UK teaching hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Voluntary participation of 200 oncology patients attending clinic. MAIN FINDINGS: Twenty-two percent of patients used CAM, with a preponderance towards younger, female patients. The commonest reasons for CAM use is to make the patient feel better and to help with their cancer. However, patients seldom believe there is more evidence for CAM or that CAM will cure them, indeed often noticing no benefits from the treatment. CAM users do not resort to complementary medicine due to dissatisfaction with their doctor but instead have considerable trust in their physicians. Only a minority believes their doctor knows about their CAM use. CONCLUSION: CAM use by oncology patients in the UK is less common than that reported elsewhere. Although patients try CAM in the hope that it will help with their treatment, they are realistic about its likely benefits. It uptake is not as an indication of lack of faith in doctors, yet physicians are frequently unaware of use. Therefore, the medical profession should not feel threatened by patients resorting to CAM but instead focus on understanding the reasons behind it.
Asunto(s)
Terapias Complementarias , Neoplasias/terapia , Relaciones Médico-Paciente , Adulto , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Terapias Complementarias/psicología , Terapias Complementarias/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Relaciones Metafisicas Mente-Cuerpo , Neoplasias/psicología , Calidad de Vida/psicología , Factores Sexuales , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Reino Unido , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Pain is a common symptom described by patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) but remains ineffectively managed. The aim of this audit was to determine what proportion of these patients report pain, then introduce the use of an analgesic ladder adapted specifically for ESKD, and finally re-evaluate the prevalence of pain symptoms, looking for an improvement. A cohort of inpatients on the renal wards of a West London teaching hospital was studied. The number of patients reporting pain and the severity of their pain on a scale of 1-10 were recorded. A considerable number of patients were barred from participating because of a language barrier. Interpreters were introduced, and the phase was repeated. The World Health Organization (WHO) three-step analgesic ladder was adapted for patients with ESKD and introduced to medical staff on the renal wards. The number of patients reporting pain and the severity of their pain were re-recorded. There was a significant reduction in the number of patients reporting pain and the severity of their pain. Pain control in patients with ESKD is improved through the use of an adapted version of the WHO analgesic ladder. Strategies must be in place for effective communication with foreign patients.